Six Principles of Global Manipulation

What is Globalization?
In the 20th century the human race was confronted with such a natural phenomenon as globalization. Globalization can be defined as the process of concentration of power over all the mankind in one person or a small group. This process has been under way throughout the whole human history and is now near completion. Centuries ago Ancient Egyptian priests became aware that globalization can be controlled. They have worked out the overall principles and patterns of controlling society to achieve their own goals, and headed up this process. Let us take a look at how globalization process is being controlled now.

Do you want to know anymore?
Look it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fF3TQ0lJnU

I can not take advantage of U-Tub right now, however, the subject is very interesting to me.

I do not know the Egyptian ideas about controlling globalization, but do know before WWI Prussian generals discussed the fact that mass production requires mass resources and mass markets. The way to assure a country has resources and markets, is by using military might to defend economic interest. I have heard a report that Germany today is totally opposed to using military force for economic defense, but there is absolutely no question that this what the US has been about since Eisenhower established the Military Industrial Complex. It doubled its work by making it shameful for women to stay home and care for their families, just as the communist did, many years earlier. Family order is almost completely broken down, as the mass of men and women work to pay the taxes that support its military might, and it uses its military might for economic defense while the masses cheer. It is like they have amnesia when it comes to history.

Eisenhower did not create the military industrial complex any more than he created industry, the military, or the presidency. He warned of it because of how powerful it had become that he couldn't stop it even if he wanted to.

Let's see, the US demobilized its military after war, until the Korean war. We did not demobilize following the Korean war, but have continually increased the military industries since then.

Eisenhower, established new connections between government and research, and has especially funded the development of military technology, as it never did before during times of peace.

Eisenhower also addressed congress regarding the National Defense Education Act, replacing Liberal Education with the German model of education for technology for military and industrial purpose. This was to last only 4 years, but became a permanent change, with huge social and economic ramifications.

Eisenhower, established new connections with the media, and the public acceptance of bombing Iraq is directly tied to the changes made during the Eisenhower administration.

The change in public education, literally changed how we train our young to think, changing from the Conceptual Method to the Behaviorist Method, creating a mechanical society such as Germany had. This is a change in education that a naval officer for when we entered the first world war, but we didn't change until the technology to fly across oceans and drop atom bombs.

The change in public education also ended the transmission of our culture, and left moral training to the church. I think this is the most dangerous of all changes Eisenhower brought about. I am sure his intentions were good when he praised the Germans for the contributions to democracy, but he lacked an understanding of the importance of culture to our liberty and justice. We have rapidly shifted to a police state since this change in education.

During this time IQ was introduced to help teachers identify those best suited for higher education, for military reasons. This was not only a radical change in what children learned and how they were taught, but also how human beings come to value each other. We have advanced this government interference in our private lives, to the "No Child Left Behind Act" which among other things, requires the school to give recruiting officers students names and addresses, unless the parents request this not be done. Something parents know nothing about.

We have added to this government mandates that have enabled the government to track us through our banking and medical care, and we can't even ride the Grey Hound bus without proper state Identification, and I remember these police state tactics were intolerable and made illegal. We have completely reversed the laws protecting our privacy, and now judge people by what is in a file, and marginalize them. This is an employment and housing problem for many that would not have been tolerated 50 years ago, but since we know longer have the culture we had 50 years ago, these changes are not only accepted by considered necessary.

One of the ways the changes have been used, besides getting public support for attacking a nation that did not attack us first, was to cut domestic spending and increase military spending, just as Germany did before entering wars. The research link, used during the Reagan administration resulted in completely ending research on poverty and in its place is research on welfare fraud. This complete change in research is obviously biased research because it was social research done for a purpose. The purpose was to scapegoat the poor for our economic problems, as surely as the Germans scapegoated the Jews if economic problems. The result was slashing domestic budgets when a recession increased the need for public assistance, and the money was poured into military spending, including granting arms to the east.

This brings us to the New Century American Project that is what Bush and Cheney and the invasion of Iraq was all about. I think you need to change your opinion about Eisenhower and the Military Industrial Complex.

I googled for a good link, and most of the links seem poorly informed, so I am not providing a link. However, if there is enough sincere interest, I could go to the U of O library and attempt to find the documents I found many years ago, about the changes made during the Eisenhower administration, and perhaps figure out to post them. What the google sources are missing is the German connection. The Military Industrial Complex was called the New World Order by Hitler and later by Bush senior and Bush junior. It is the brain child of Prussian generals before the first world war, on steroids!

I don't need to change anything, you need to stop making assumptions and reading what you want into my words.

No president is the source of all the policy its administration produces, nor are they in control of all decisions.

The only point I was making is, as usual, there is more going on behind the scenes. Bush was a puppet like all before him.

The presidency is a figurehead position. They don't even tend to write their own speaches etc.

I have no particular feelings toward Eisenhower but do make note of his attempted warning on his way out, which shows what one learns or has no control over to begin with.

And I certainly am not a fan of the military industrial complex and don't think you should be suggesting I change my position, do you want me to like it?

You are very good at not listing to what people say vs what you want to hear, congrats.

quote:

---

Principle 5. Weapon of Genocide.

'All the crimes on Earth do not destroy so many of the human race, nor alienate so much property, as drunkenness' – Sir Francis Bacon

The next step in the process of globalization was the transition from 'hot wars' waged by ordinary weapons to 'cold wars' waged through the so called 'cultural co-operation'. It's possible to completely eliminate or subdue a whole nation to one's own will by means of such genocide weapons as drugs, alcohol, tobacco, several types of vaccines and genetically modified foods. Yet to keep people unaware of the destructive nature of these weapons they have been disguised as superficially harmless means of relaxation, stress relief, amusement and acquiring immunity to disease. This idea is being inculcated in the minds through culture, mass media, and specially planted proverbs and tokens. In reality these substances are dangerous poisons undermining the genetics of the human species, destroying the human being both morally and physically, wiping out the existing and future generations. Russia annually loses more than 700 thousand human lives due to the effects of alcohol consumption only. Is it a conscious and free choice of every person? Negative! This is an artificial and false option imposed on us through culture. It suggests that from the very cradle a person is to pick either a lie number 1 – 'take dope moderately' or a lie number 2 – 'take as much dope as you please'.

---

This is interesting. Who is the enemy committing this genocide? I have always thought, a nation that is suppose to represent rule by law, such as the US, should respect the laws of Muslim countries, forbidding the use of alcohol, and prevent their citizens and military personnel from consuming alcohol in these countries.

The US is supposedly waging a war on drugs, which means its military can enter any country, on the pretense of waging war on drugs, and its military can bring drug prevention programs to the schools. It makes drugs illegal and assumes the right to prosecute those who break the law, and yet US citizens assume they have a right to consume and sell alcohol wherever they like, and where its military goes, so does the alcohol. Isn't this hypocritical?

Isn't drug use a matter of personal freedom and rights? Who is the enemy who uses this as a weapon of genocide?

Ironwood you said, "Eisenhower did not create the military industrial complex." Perhaps I interpreted this incorrectly? Were you saying the Military Industrial Complex does not exist? Or are you saying it does exist, but Eisenhower was not responsible for this? Are you arguing he did not take the executive actions that I said he took? Are you arguing being the first president to not demobilize us following a war, is not about establishing the Military Industrial Complex as a permanent feature of our lives?

If you believe the Military Industrial Complex does exist, but it was not Eisenhower who is the President that made this so, then how did it happen that the Military Industrial Complex came into existence?

Again, more slowly.

There is always more to the story, do you understand this concept.

As I have been forced to tell you many times due to some stubborn notion that I don't understand or agree with the basics you present, for the most part I do, but there is always more to the story which can also be correct and adds perspective and is usually the true root cause.

Again to illustrate the point, with finger paints if needed, a president is a puppet, someones hidden hand moves or influences him.

Is this simple enough to possibly sink in for once? I know I'm not holding my breath, but I have faith in you.

Our positions don't appear to differ.

So why you are so insistent upon listening to what I have to offer is beyond me, but makes me very wary of you.

If you don't know about organized crime and conspiracy that shapes your beloved history, I suggest you change that, if you keep fighting and resisting me on even having the discussion, I will continue to expose your obstructionist behavior.

I like having you around as a resource, but I will not allow you to hinder reality with your apparently limited, controlling, ways that hinder truth seeking and dissemination of extremely important factual information.

I do not condone those who avoid root causes and only address symptoms. That is a recipe for continued disease.

Hi, I was hoping you would continue your argument.
Now what do Eisenhower, Reagan and Bush and Bush have in common? What is the resource upon which all industrial economies depend? What was the resource that countries were fighting over in the second world war?

How about discussing Machiavelli's writings on ethics, morals, and how they relate to the State and revolution in his writings on Passive Revolution, and how a society can be manipulated by controlling popular notions of morality? And Straus and Bush's education?

Do you even care about getting to the actual bottom of the issue? Do you even know what it is?

What do you think are the most important changes needed to be made to fix this country and or the world?

And to humor you, what those men have in common, let's see, off the top of my head, yes, your precious oil, drugs, assassins, gun running, cia, death squads, secret societies, foreign wars, propaganda, indictments, scandal, male prostitutes, raping and murdering children, cults,
the usual.

Oh shit, for a brief moment you said something worthy of discussion, and then you ruined it by throwing in a lot of stuff that doesn't matter. Now I don't know if you know the difference between what matters and what does not. Going on most your post, you do not, and I am getting bored with this. If no one has anything intelligent to say soon, I am out of here. I am so glad I am leaving this planet soon, because you all are so unprepared to handle the problems you are going to face, and you obviously don't think there is anything important to learn. I thought men outgrew this problem by 30, but obviously not. You all make the opinion that humans are intelligent a sick joke.

Hmmm, that doesn't sound like an answer to me, I could be mistaken.

Oh, enjoy your trip by the way.

"I am so glad I am leaving this planet soon"

WHAT? lol I swear, when I read that I got scared, then laughed.

Where are you going?

Cs,

Are you familiar with the power structure of the world?

International bankers controlling central banks that lend governments fist currency at interest that can never be repaid without borrowing more fist money with debt attached in an endless cycle of perpetual debt and consolidation of wealth and power?

Are you aware that they own some 90% of the worlds land wealth and resources through various companies?

Did you know that global corporations weild more power than goverments, both of which are owned and run by the international bankers?

Do you understand how the lobbyisr system, revolving doors between politicians and lawmakers between government jobs and heads of corporations and corporate boards have created legalized corruption?

Do you realize that with changes in laws for transparency in goverment, monoply breaking, the role of advertising in media, and the power of corporations and influence of lobbyists, the end of interest or usury, and general re establishment of freedom to choose information, medical care, news, while giving proper freedom and equally to information and voices of the people, all would change?

We are being lied to to rediculous degrees, once we are properly informed and know the truth this will change.

Our education system wont save us untill truth is taught in schools.

The New World Order or Military Industrial Complex comes to us through Prussia. However, it was president Eisenhower who established it in the US.

From "The Anglo-German Problem" published in 1915

Dr. Friedrich Naumann has emphasized the fundamental differences between the war of yesterday and the war of to-morrow, and has pointed out what will be the chief difficulties the military command will have to contend with.

The war of the future is a problem of economic organization of the most difficult nature and the highest technical achievement, such as as never been hitherto demanded from any army. The old military qualities must give way to the organizing qualities. No doubt the courage and endurance of the individual soldier must remain for all times the foundation of military power, but organizing genius is required in order not to waste that courage and endurance. This is clearly shown from a mere examination of the colossal numbers engaged. To transport, to locate, and to feed these masses of men is the daily preoccupation of the military authorities. That they rightly understand the nature of the problem is certain, but it is very doubtful whether the problem can ever be adequately solved by commanders who are not recruited from the Junkertum. Mere military capacity does not suffice here. Both enemies and friends admit that our corps of officers possess such military capacity. Anxiety only arises with regard to their other qualifications. We know that our nation possesses in its industries successful organizers, brains accustomed to direct great quantities of material and "personnel" - men who create new conditions of life for whole economic districts without having to appeal to any mystical authority. As democratic politicians we may often have to oppose bitterly those captains of industry, but if it come to war we shall be willing to be led by them, because we know that they have the brains. It is true that they much not meddle with technical duties of the officers, but the administration of the war material must be their province. And even with regard to the technique of war, it becomes from year to year more questionable whether this can be managed more efficiently by a corps of noblemen than by the representatives of middle class technique. However much we may value the moral qualities of the old ruling class- and, with all political differences of opinion, we shall not minimize those qualities- we must admit that we are witnessing a transformation of methods of attack and defence which in addition to the old question of iron discipline raises the modern question: how far shall we be able on the battle field to replace the human unit through machinery? It is obvious that this will never succeed completely, for there does not exist a machine which does not need a human soul to work it. At the same time it is doubtless that in this direction mighty changes are at hand. We can see here a repetition of the process which we notice in nearly all industries- the subordination and displacement of human labour in mines, machines, and means of transport. If you examine a weaving mill you shall find comparatively few men; but those units must have the mechanical ability in the blood. Those conditions do already exist to a large extent in naval warfare. Ships are built and equipped with an insignificant number of men compared their fighting power. But those men must work like animated machines. Even so the air fleet of to-morrow will demand a large amount of technical application and technical ability, but very few military units. War is becoming impersonal, and is becoming reduced to a rivalry of money and economics. That even here military members of the nobility may achieve great results is shown by the admirable example of Count Zeppelin. But the impression remains that there still survive in the army the traditions of the pre.industrial age- traditions not only of loyalty and discipline, but also of technical ignorance. We have still too much of the parade soldier whose knees are more pliable then his fingers or his brain. The industrializing of the army is coming, but very slowly. It begins with the artillery, but it ends at the cavalry. We have still failed fully to realize that under a system of universal service a nation pays and labours in order that its weapons shall be absolutely of the first class. The nation which can put the best technique into the military service will probably, in the altered conditions of modern warfare, achieve victory.